Resha Singh @ Ram Resh Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61144 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Resha Singh @ Ram Resh Singh Son of Late Chandrika Singh R/V-VillageSamahuta, P.S.- Rohtas, Distt.- Rohtas 2.
Mithila Devi @ Mijala Devi Wife of Resha Singh @ Ram Resh Singh R/VVillage- Samahuta, P.S.- Rohtas, Distt.- Rohtas 3.
Navin Singh @ Navin Kumar Singh Son of Resha Singh @ Ram Resh Singh R/V-Village- Samahuta, P.S.- Rohtas, Distt.- Rohtas 4.
Alok Singh @ Alok Kumar Son of Resha Singh @ Ram Resh Singh R/VVillage- Samahuta, P.S.- Rohtas, Distt.- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-09-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 154 of 2024 dated 01.05.2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 304B, 201 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners are in-laws of the deceased, the allegations levelled in the FIR are totally false in fact, the deceased, who happened to be the daughter-in-law of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61144 of 2024(2) dt.18-09-2024 2/3 petitioner nos. 1 and 2, herself consumed poison and thereafter her health condition deteriorated and then all the petitioners and other family members of them took the deceased to Adri Devi Memorial Hospital, Dehri from where she was referred and then the deceased was taken to Narain Medical College and Hospital, Jamuhar for better treatment where she was treated and finally she died. Learned counsel further submits that Annexure-P/2 clearly shows that at the relevant time, the deceased was suffering from poisoning and during the medical treatment of the deceased, her father was also informed and thereafter the deceased body was cremated in the presence of the informant and thereafter, the FIR was registered after five days.
Learned counsel further submits that after the lodging of the FIR, the informant realized his mistake and then filed a compromise petition (Annexure P/3) before the trial court and further all the petitioners were living separate from the husband of the deceased and they had no concern with the affairs of the husband of the deceased at the relevant time and they have been falsely implicated.
4. Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioners.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61144 of 2024(2) dt.18-09-2024 3/3
5. Considering the above submissions and mainly taking into account the petitioners' pleas discussed above, in my opinion, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, let the petitioners named-above, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No. 154 of 2024 on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Shailendra Singh, J) Rajiv/- U T